As I worked through the population module yesterday afternoon, I soon realised that I didn't have any notes on any of the migration case studies and so I have spent this morning reading up about each of them and I thought, due to the fact that I know I am not the only one lacking notes on this, that I would type them up on here instead of writing them all out by hand.
Bosnia is predominantly a mountainous country with only a few regions of flat grass land used for farming. This is where most of the ethnic cleansing took place and so this caused problems with food supplies as farmers and their families migrated away from the unsafe countryside to the cities. Flat land was fiercely fought over as it was the most suitable land to farm.
The areas where people migrated to quickly became overcrowded and refugee camps started to appear like the one near Kosovo. It was reported that over 4000 people were fleeing into camp near Kosovo every hour. This stretched public services and also provoked higher crime rates as people became desperate. The land nearer the cities and towns was harder or impossible to farm and so food shortages were an issue.
Rural to urban migration has lead to an uneven distrubtion of skills. This has also meant that food production has been reduced as farmers left the countryside for safety. This has meant that their was no one left to farm the land. Ethnic cleansing has increased the seperation between the different ethnic groups that reside in \Bosnia Herzegovina and the violation of human rights has been reported to still occur; especially amognst the refugees that are still returning home. Although the European Union Peacekeeping Troops are still present in Bosnia Herzegovina to try and maintain the peace and stability; things are starting to improve. It is estimated that 579 000 people have returned to their original homes with many more locally intergrated.
Africa to Western Europe
Origin of the Area
Many of the countries in Africa face political instability or are under dictatorial rulers that seem to care little about the quality of life and social welfare of those in the country. Health care is poor, or non- existant, and with HIV and malaria being rife in many of the countries that make up this contient life expectancy is extremely low (the average in Africa is 47 years). The accessibilty to education is also a big problem across much of Africa and job oppurtunites are hard to find. Access to clean water, food, electricity and many of the things people in the developed world take for granted, are also extremely hard to come by.
Push Factors
Þ Lack of health care
Þ Lack of education
Þ Conflict and political instability
Þ Poor public services and other facilites
Þ Lack of employment and economic stability
Þ Lack of infrastucture
Þ Lack of religious freedom
Pull Factors
Þ Free health care and education
Þ More polictically and economically stable
Þ More job oppurtunites with a minimum wage enforced
Þ Better and more widely avaiable facilites and public services
Þ Laws enforced in a fair and humane way means safety
Migration Obstacles
Travelling on old fishing boats from Africa to Europe is very dangerous and many do not survive the route (in June this year, 24 Africans drowned after a dinghy capsized south of Malta)which, due to people smugglers, can cost up to 2000 Euros. I Also once you get to a country like Spain, which is popular due to the fact that it is one of the closest European countries, many often get expelled from the country or repatriated. The language barrier can also present problems when it comes to communication and with living costs being so much higher in European countries, most cannot afford to find somewhere to live. The cultral barrier is another obstacle that needs to be overcome but perhaps the biggest is gaining the right to permanent residence in that country.
Positives about the orgin
The culture, language and climate are the same and all very different to those found in European countries. The skills that many of these immigrants have are most applicable to the conditions found in their origins.
Negatives about the destination
The cost of living is very high and separation between immigrants and the people already living in the destination can create tension and, in some extreme cases, result in violence. High taxes also have to be paid.
Effects of migration
- In 2006, about 22,016 people reached Italy by boat from Africa
- The majority of African migrants live in Europe with an estimated 4.6 million doing so compared to only 890,000 in the USA
- About two-thirds of Africans in Europe are from North Africa
Having migrated, many of the migrants send home money to family members they have left behind. Billions of dollars each year is sent back to Africa from migrants scattered around the world and, in some cases, this makes up sizeable chunks of the origin country’s GDP. However, it leaves many families seperated and again leads to a lack of skilled people in the origin. The impacts on the destination are, perhaps, mainly negative as huge amounts of money has to be invested in combacting illegal migration. The legal migrants though, do help to bolster a country’s workforce which, in countries like the UK who have an ageing population, is crucial if they are to maintain a certain degree of economic stability.
Brain Drain from UK to USA
Push Factors
Þ High taxes which, in the near future, are only expected to get higher
Þ High house prices and day to day living costs
Þ Poor climate
Þ Career stagnation is making it harder and harder for newly qualified graduates to get a job
Þ Lower salaries
Þ Industrial unrest
Pull Factors
Þ Higher initial salaries are offered in the USA compared to the UK
Þ American universites and research companies have made the effort to attract graduates over to the USA
Þ Many feel that they have a better chance of getting a job in America
Þ Many just want to take the oppurtunity to work abroad and see it as part of their personal development
Þ No language barreir
Migration Obstacles
The cost of moving to America is without a doubt the biggest obstacle that needs to be overcome. The costs involved with moving to America would be huge but the fact that so many people chose to move to America suggests that the rewards must be very high. Distance is another obstacle as moving to America means that you are a long way away from family members and friends. Getting a green card/visa is also another obstacle that needs to be overcome by people wishing to move to America.
Positives about the orgin
Free health care and education system are the biggest positives about the origin. Being part of the EU means that travelling amongst other countries in Europe is easy.
Negatives about the destination
Health care system is run slightly differently and so you end up paying a lot more for it then you, indirectly, do in the UK. Higher crime rates, especially gun crime rates due to different laws. America experiences hurricanes and wildfires and earthquakes, amongst other things, that do not occur in the UK due to the climate and location.
Neutral factors of the origin and destination
There are similarities between the origin and destination like the fact that the same languages are spoken and, in terms of development, they are on very similar levels. This means that the facilities found, and the quality of them, will be very similar. Compared to other countries they are both quite politically stable with similar military activities in other countries.
Effects of migration
This migration has led to an uneven distribution of skills. This has rapidly changed British society as large numbers of highly skilled graduates are moving abroad and this is not match by those migrating to the UK. However, this brain drain has attracted more than a million skilled immigrants to the UK which has helped to reduce the impacts of this trend. It is believed that if the UK stopped attracting graduates from abroad the full force of the impacts of this trend would be felt. This emmigration trend is costing the country a lot of money as, for example, it costs £250,000 to train a junior doctor who, like many, is choosing to practice abroad (it is estimated that 37.7% of those emmigrating have health or education qualifications). This is greatly benefitting the USA who don’t have to pay for the training of professionals but are benefitting from their education, which was funded by the UK.
Poland to the UK
Origin of the Area
Poland was admitted to the EU on 1st April 2004 and with this came the right for any citizen of Poland to move freely around all the other EU countries. On the accession to the EU, it was anticipated that levels of migration from Poland and the other A8 countries (all former communist bloc countries in central and eastern Europe) to the UK would drastically increase and this is excatly what happened. Living conditions in Poland are poor and unemployment is a huge problem and so many people have been attracted to the UK. This is only one of the three major waves of Polish immigration to the UK though. The first wave was as a result of wartime displacement and deportation with the Nazi occupation of Polish territory. The second wave occurred during the cold war when, despite the heavy restrictions on movement imposed by communist authorites, several thousand Poles joined existing groups in the UK.
Push Factors
Þ High levels of unemployment – in 2005, 18.5% of those at working age were unemployed in Poland
Þ Poor living conditions
Þ Low salaries
Þ Poor public services and other facilites
Pull Factors
Þ The UK was one of only three countries (the other two being Ireland and Sweden) who didn’t put a limit on the number of migrants from A8 countries who could enter the country
Þ English is spoken as the second language in Poland and so there was no language barrier, as such, to overcome
Þ Migration was easy to the UK due to cheap flights and coach services
Þ Plenty of avaliable jobs in the UK due to a skills shortage (think about the Brain Drain to the USA)
Þ An average Polish worker could earn five times the amount he could in the UK compared to what they could earn in Poland
Migration Obstacles
Compared to the other case studies there are not many obstacles that had to be overcome. Language was not an issue, entry to the country was not an issue and budget airlines were able to offer relatively cheap transport to the UK.
Who are the migrants?
- Around 80% are aged 18 to 34
- Only one in ten have brought dependents with them
- Only 3% have brought dependents with them who are under 17
- The average age is 28
- Most of them are single
- The ratio of males to females is 58:42
- Most of them are skilled/semi-skilled industrial workers and tradesmen
- No real demographic concentrations as they choose to reside in both rural and urban areas up and down the country
- 97% of the immigrants work full time
Neutral factors of the origin and destination
In terms of development, the origin and destination, as they are noth memebers of the EU, should be very similar. The language barrier is not present, so to speak, as English is taught as a second language in Poland. Cultural differences are not going to be wildly different either.
Effects of migration
It has been estimated that Eastern European immigrants have contributed £2.5billion to the UK’s economy and roughly 1% of the UK’s growth in 2006 was attributed to the same workers. British businesses have been able to cash in on the new market created by the presense of the young, single Poles who seem keen to join the consumer culture common in the UK. Polish shops and businesses have helped to start and rejuvenate the seriously declining shopping streets of the UK and also swell the size of church congregations. The migrants, 80% of which are aged between 18 and 34, have helped the UK cope with the problems being provoked by the ageing population by filling the gaps in the UK’s labour market and have also helped to fill the skills gap created by the brain drain. However, additional stress has been placed on the education and health care systems and demand for housing has further driven renting/buying prices higher. Also much of the money earnt is not staying in the UK as it is being sent back to Poland. In Poland, itself, this migration of young workers to the UK has helped to reduce the unemployment problems but has been blamed for increased divorce rates.
India to Dubai
- In the UAE, 90% of the workforce (10 million people) are migrants, most of which originate from the rural areas of India, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
- Dubai has a population of 1.5 million and 1 million of these people are migrants.
- As Dubai’s oil reserves are declining the ruling family, Maktoums, wanted to invest their wealth to make Dubai the best city and so they created lots of long term building projects. Many migrants have seen this as an opportunity to earn some money whilst enjoying the glamorous city life that Dubai claims to offer.
- The average wage of a migrant in Dubai is $4 a day and most of this is sent back home to their families.
- Migrants who get work on one of the long term building projects have to pay for their travel to Dubai and on arrival their passports are confiscated while they are on a contract with a firm. Exit visas can’t be obtained without approval of a sponsor or an employer. These workers live in the workers’ camps which are remote and cramped and constructed in the desert. This thereby adds extra time, for journeying to and from the construction site, to an already long enough 12 hour shift. There are also many accusations of discrimination and violence from employers, police and security forces including sexual assaults of women.
Push Factors
Þ Poor infrastructure and lack of housing and santitation
Þ Areas very densely populated
Þ Lack of job oppurtunities
Þ Monsoon rains hampering economic progress
Þ Lack of natural resources
Þ Poor standard of living
Þ Low salaries
Pull Factors
Þ In 2007, it was named the world’s fastest growing city
Þ More job oppurtunites – all of which are better paid
Þ More stable economy
Þ Better infastructure anf facilities
Þ Believed to offer a better quality of life
Migration Obstacles
Again the costs involved with moving are high and once you are there you are not guaranteed a job. The is also the language barrier and the cultral differences that migrants have to overcome.
Positives about the orgin
Depends greatly on where in India the people are emigrating from. A few regions, like Kerala, have good education and health care services and equality for all.
Negatives about the destination
Many of the negatives have been mentioned at the start of this case study but to reinforce the idea……..the working conditions and the living conditions provided are very poor and violence appears to be common. Wages are not great as there is no minimum wage and spending 12 hours in the heat, building skyscrapers is not ideal. The employers also fail to pay for many things that they should including health care costs and visa fees. The corruption of the employers who, illegally, hold on to workers passports means that once in Dubai it is very, very hard to leave.
Neutral factors of the origin and destination
Living conditions do not seem to be that different and corruption among officals is something that is common to both countries.
Effects of migration
It has eased the unemployment problems in India but has left a shortage of men to work the land and produce food for the country, as they are the ones who have been migrating to Dubai for the manual labour. The migrants offer cheap labour for Dubai and are prepared to work long hours doing the manual labour required to develop the infrastructure that is required to attract people from the developed world to this region. Despite a tight control on the media, local newspapers etc have reported on and opened the worlds eyes to the dreadful conditions and abuse experienced by the migrant workers in Dubai which has started to give it, and rightfully so, a bit of a bad reputation. Many migrants want to move back to India, but cannot at present afford to or travel as their employers hold on to their passports. When they do manage to move back to though, Dubai is going to be left with a huge gap in its society which will affect its development, whilst the unemployment problems still present in India will be furthered.
Rwanda to DR Congo
Origin of the Area
Rwanda is in central Africa, east of Democratic Republic of the Congo where the separation between the Hutu and Tusi has caused huge problems and forced many to migrate to the DR Congo. The tension between these two groups was first created when the Belgian colonists treated the Tutsi as the superior group despite the fact the Hutu were the majority. On 6th April 1994 genocide was sparked when the Rwandan president Juvenal Habyarimana’s plane was shot from the air above Kigali airport. With less than hours after the attack, a campaign of violence spread from the capital throughout the country, and did not subside until three months later. In Kigali, the presidential guard immediately initiated an operation of retribution. Leaders of the political opposition were murdered, and almost instantly, the slaughter of Tutsis and moderate Hutus began. This conflict later became known as the Rwandan Genocide and lasted 100 days and claimed the lives of close to 1 million people (the majority of which were Tutsis). In July, of that year, the Tutsi’s managed to gain control of the capital Kigali and declare a ceasefire. The Hutu, fearing retribution attacks, fled to Zaire (which is now the DR Congo). It is estimated that around 2 million refugees fled from Rwanda.
Push Factors
Þ Heavy conflict meant that the threat of losing your life was forever present
Þ Lack of tolerance for religious and cultral diversity
Þ Frequent violations of basic human rights
Þ Lack of employment and economic stability – conflict destroyed crops and farm land (think about the Bikes to Rwanda case study we did in the energy module and how the genocide effected the once thriving coffee industry which, at present, is still struggling to recover)
Þ Destruction of property and infastructure due to the conflict
Pull Factors
Þ DR Congo was more stable than Rwanda
Þ Safety
Þ Not to far away (think about distance decay)
Þ Better infastructure that had not been devasted by the conflict
Migration Obstacles
Surviving the journey to the DR Congo was the biggest obstacle as many feared for their lives. The migrants had also lost everything and so life, if they managed to get into the DR Congo, would be extremely hard.
Positives about the orgin
The Hutu’s were in a majority in Rwanda and safety often comes in numbers. Coffee plantations offered the most employment and many men had skills in these areas which were harder to apply in the DR Congo.
Negatives about the destination
Many of the tribes in DR Congo (then Zaire) had links to the Tutsi’s and so the Hutu’s were not always received very well. The country also had its own problems including civil unrest, unemployment and lack of food and access to clean water in many areas.
Neutral factors of the origin and destination
Both countries had been under Beligium colonail rule and, after they claimed independence, both countries became unstable in terms of the econonic, political and social aspects of life.
Effects of migration
This migration ultimately led to many wars in Zaire as some of the tribes had Tutsi links and it was as if the conflict in Rwanda just spilled over into the DR Congo. There have also been reports of Rwanda supplying arms and soliders to the Tutsi rebels in DR Congo. Refugee camps had to be set up to accommodate this sudden migration and thousands of the migrants died in epidemics of diseases common to the squalor of refugee camps, such as cholera and dysentery.
These are only a few rough notes that I made quickly this morning to try and fill the gaps in my knowledge. There are other things that you can add under each heading as I didn’t bother with all of the really obvious push and pull factors, for example, or bother writing about some of the origins as I think most of you will know enough of the basics about some of the countries. If you get the chance, I would suggest reading the book Blood River by Tim Butcher as it mentions the Rwandan Genocide and the effects that both Belgium colonial rule and the migration have had on the DR Congo – I started reading it the other day and it is extremely good so far (review probably won’t appear until after my exams though) and I have been struggling to put it down! Anyway back to the revision, I hope this is useful and I think I covered all the basics – let me know if there is anything I crucial I have missed out!
My Geography film of the week this week was Darfur - a film that was suggested we watched for the Development and Globalisation module. Before I write any more I have to emphasise that Millie's warning about this film is one to strongly consider before watching it as it is very graphic (really not one for the faint hearted) and is a film that I would suggest you watch with a cushion nearby to hide behind - trust me, it is more graphic and horrifically shocking than 'Shooting Dogs', that film Millie made us watch at Christmas!
I am not quite sure how much you will know about what has happened in Sudan, before it split this year, and the events that this film is losely based on, so I will attempt to summarise some of the key points. Civil conflict has occured on and off in Sudan for decades but in 2003, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and Justice and Equality Movement (Jem) began attacking governments targets after accusing Khartoum of oppressing black Africans in favour of Arabs. Most of the tension built up in the Darfur region which had already experienced decades of violence and tension over land and grazing rights between the mostly nomadic Arabs and farmers from Massaleet and Zaghawa communities. Government response to this rebellion wasn't approved by the international community as they admitted to mobilising what they classed as ' self-defence militia'. However the President denied all accusations that they had links to the Arab Janjaweed militia who were accused of trying to drive out black Africans from large expanses of Sudan. Refugees from this conflict say that this is wrong as air raids by government aircraft were followed by Janjaweed attacks, who would ride into villages on horses and camels, slaughtering men, raping women, taking children and stealing whatever they could find. 
There has been a lot of controversy over whether or not it should be classed as a genocide as firstly they are unsure excatly how many were killed and many of those that died, died due to starvation or disease. Many human rights groups and the US have said that genocide has infact taken place but, after an investigation in 2005, the UN concluded that war crimes had been committed but there had been no intent to commit genocide. The UN has estimated that since 2003 over 300,000 people have died (mainly believe that the actually figure is much higher) whilst 2.7 million have been displaced - mainly to refugee camps near the main towns or to neighbouring Chad where, as it has a similar ethnic make-up to Darfur, the violence has spilt over. The situation in Sudan has been incredibly unstable and unsecure for years and so many aid agencies have been unable to reach those that most need the help with some even being banned from northern Sudan following the arrest warrant for the President in 2009 for alleged war crimes.
Is this a good geography film? Well, before I watched it my brother asked my what it was all about so I told him a bit about the background to the film and his first remark was to question what excatly genocide and the recent events in Darfur have got to do with Geography. Whats the answer.......well genocide effects both people and the environment and geography is all about people and the environment and how the interact. Going down the more human geography route first, genocide has impacts that can fill all the parts of S.P.E.E.D. Often the conflict can stem from social unrest, which can be generated via political unrest, and results in huge long-lasting societal and political changes. Geopolitics can become involved due to the view taken and role played by the international community. This can, in turn, lead to trade embargoes and cause fluctutations in the global market and thus effect the economies in countries across the world aswell as the country in which the conflict occurs. Demographically, bites would become visible in population pyramids of that country whilst bulges in others due to forced migration. The mass migration away from the affected regions provokes the development of refugee camps which further increase issues with food and water availability, sanitation, spread of disease and all the other problems that are generated by the shear volume of people in such a small area being dependent on already previously limited resources. Migration to other countries only allows the violence and detrimental impacts of the conflict to spill over into neighbouring countries - an action in some cases that only sustains the violence. You can then link it to issues with aid getting to the people who need it and what types of aid are best in these situations etc. Honestly, this list could go on and on and I am sure you could think of a dozen more links to human geography straight away without too much thought; so what about physical geography? This is slightly harder but not impossible, especially if you look into what provoked the conflict. In a previous post I have already touched on the link between climatic changes and conflict and, with particular reference to the Darfur crisis, there is debate over the role played by regional climate changes in the initiation of the conflict with many arguing that drought and desertification played an influential role in stimulating civil unrest. You then have all the impacts that the conflict has on the environment so for example, if you can remember back to when we did that assignment for the energy module which included questions on the use of appropriate technology in Rwanda to help the coffee farmers as the conflict has destroyed much of the plantations and left the land unusable which then obvisouly have knock impacts on society. So, hopefully this proves the link between genocide and geography (I did manage to persuade my brother they were linked, although not to watch the film) so now I need to answer whether or not this is a good geography film.......
This film seems to have the sole purpose of shocking the watcher and it very successfully does this by presenting some truly horrific scenes. In terms of educational content, it definetly replicates what life in Darfur in the height of the conflict would have been like for people but it leaves a lot of questions unanswered - something which, to a certain extent, can be good as it should inspire you to go away and do your own research/reading into the topic. I think in relation to our geography course it is a film to watch and then link it to what you know about development, factors that affect it and the current situation in that part of the world etc. The current situation in Africa definetly sprung to mind: why didn't NATO and other international organisations get involved straight away to provide protection for the people when they rather rapidly got involved in Libya this year? For me, as a geography film from an educational perspective, I think it focuses too much on shocking the audience than necessarily educating them, although it does pick on a few key points like issues with aid agencies and the role of the international community, and I think most people will end up spending rather a lot of the time not actually watching the film but looking away (I certainly did!). I have to admit though that although I recognise that in some cases people need to be shocked into realising/accepting/understanding/taking action etc., I am not a big fan of it and I personally feel that this film went a little bit to far down that route. Despite this, there are many things that you can learn from the film and it is, without a doubt, very thought provoking! If you have a strong stomach then watch it and read up on the details about the Darfur Crisis afterwards, the knowledge you will gain from doing so will really help with geography in general as it can be linked to some many different topics - I think you could possibly even link it right back to colonialsim in relation to how colonial powers literally chopped up Africa, with no consideration of how they were dividing cultural and ethnic groups and, certainly in Sudan, the north saw far greater development than the south. After watching this film you will certainly be able to understand why both North Sudan and South Sudan are at their currently levels of development. 
